About your Search

20130126
20130203
STATION
MSNBCW 40
MSNBC 39
FOXNEWS 19
CSPAN 14
CNN 12
CNNW 12
KQED (PBS) 6
WRC (NBC) 6
CSPAN2 5
KGO (ABC) 4
KRCB (PBS) 4
WETA 4
WJLA (ABC) 3
FBC 2
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 203
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 203 (some duplicates have been removed)
the press" conversation. this week a focus on foreign policy. it didn't get much attention in the president's inaugural address, but as his second term is underway, there's certainly a lot of focus on some of the big areas that he will be occupied by when it comes to national security and the world. what are some of the big bets that president obama can make to cement his legacy abroad? joining me is martin indyk of the brookings institution, an assistant secretary of state for president clinton and also the author of "bending history, barack obama's foreign policy." i got to take part in a conversation of big bets, black swans, a presidential briefing where you and the team at brookings write about both some of the real dangers in foreign policy as well as some areas where the president can make an impact if he so chooses. there's a lot to digest including the fact a new secretary of state is going to be presumably confirmed by the senate, john kerry. and yet in the financial times as we do this interview it is hillary clinton and the questions she faced about the death of our ambassador a
on whether she has left america's foreign policy in stronger or weaker position. most think the future lies with china than the u.s. it's not all mrs. clinton's fault. but the fact is we just don't have the influence we used to have around the world from syria to mali, we have led from behind, so in effect the former secretary of state has helped manage our decline in what looks increasingly like a post american world. and that's the memo. now on to the top story. another view on this, joining us now from new york, fox news contributor julie ragenski and former advisor to frank lautenberg and president rosenberg a center left think tank and campaign advisor to president clinton. all right, simon, tell me, where did i go wrong there on judging mrs. clinton? highly intelligent, global celebrity. >> yep. >> incredible run from first lady to senator to secretary. why was this a great tenure as secretary of state? >> first of all agrow agree with the negative characterization. i think we are safer today in the world than when barack obama took office. i think there have within two central legaci
't extreme and chuck schumer would not endorse somebody, his views on foreign policy are middle of the road. he wouldn't endorse somebody who was extreme. i think his vietnam experience is important. it's been noted and it's important that you now have at state john kerry and you would have at defense chuck hagel, two veterans of vietnam who look back and say we are ib clind to be very cautious before we commit american lives to any kind of foreign intervention. we want to be able to tell the troops. and hagel has characterized himself as an old sergeant, wants to tell the truth, so we need to make this fight. i think the good thing this hearing if it went there instead of just kind of particular attacks or questions to hagel, if this hearing went to a larger discussion of president obama's foreign policy because in broad terms hagel is with obama. obama's view is this is a moment when we need to pull back a bit, rebuild at home, and rethink some of these commitments. the americans are tired of war at this moment, and i think hagel really represents that exhaustion with the war and the desi
the speech given last night by this president represents the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam. if it's carried out, i will resist it. in march 2008 you said, quote, here the term "quagmire" could apply. >> what are these? the full bright hearings? i lived through them? this is kind of like a 1970s movie where you go back into the past where it never even happened. why is he fighting with him about vietnam. >> it's interesting. he's fighting with him over iraq but it seems to be vietnam. he seems to be mad that hagel took issue with him about iraq and compared it to vietnam being the big blunder, which, of course, hagel and mccain both served in. when mccain talks about iraq, he only wants to talk about it from the surge on. it's as if everything before that didn't happen and didn't count and we ask still debate whether it worked or not but the big decision is whether it was as big as vietnam. and he didn't want to have that argument. >> he dug into his ankle here and he wouldn't let go. let's listen again. back again to the old war. >> were you co
of a foreign service officer. learning about foreign-policy around the dinner table each night to this service in combat -- his service in combat in vietnam. less well known is the story of this foreign policy work inside dissonant. -- the senate. his 90 overseas trips that he made in 28 years on foreign relations committee, his work to ensure free elections in the philippines, his work with aids in africa, his work as chairman of the new start treaty and his very public and successful diplomatic intervention in afghanistan, pakistan, and sudan. historians will judged his senate years on his impact on foreign policy much the same way so many people recognized ted kennedy's impact on domestic policy. from his many years in the u.s. senate, he has developed a very personal understanding that we represent not just states or governments, but also people. i once asked john why he loves the senate. he said it is the pride he feels in trying to get things done for people. for three years now, he has been working quietly to help a father from massachusetts, whose two sons were kidnapped and taken to
be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam. were you correct or incorrect? yes or no? >> when given a chance to respond, here is what hagel said. >> the comment i made about the most dangerous foreign policy decision since vietnam was about not just the surge, but the overall war of choice going into iraq. >> that point found broad support in our latest nbc news/"wall street journal" poll with nearly 6 in 10 americans saying the entire iraq war was not worth it. let's remember that the mccain/hagel grudge goes way back to comments, well, like these. >> well, i think our invasion and occupation of iraq represents one of the great blunters of american history, and we will pay a high price for this for a long time. >> now, that would be in march 2008. you remember, it's the year that barack obama won his first term as president defeating none other than john mccain. do you think mccain is still angry that hagel backed obama? holding a judge? no, never. if mccain played the betrayed besty, fellow republican lindsey graham took the role of disappointed dad over his r
it to marriages or affairs, but the fact that they'd been side by side on a lot of foreign policy stuff 10 and 20 years ago and then had a break over the war in iraq and then chuck hagel didn't support john mccain when he was running for president. gwen: he did the first time but not the second time. >> right, when he was actually a candidate. gwen: the actual nominee. >> and then finally the fact that john mccain believes very deeply in his own positions and wanted to prove himself right and hagel wrong and thought he had him on the surge. all of that. >> so it was great theater. as gwen said, hagel got beaten up. is he going to get confirmed? >> yes. and it is bizarre in a that she knows probably the worst confirmation hearing performance that any of us can remember of any nominee -- certainly for a cabinet position. supreme court nominations are a little different. and it all comes down to there are 55 democrats. none of those democrats have said they will vote against him. ok. one republican, thad cochran of mississippi has said he will vote for hagel. that makes him the unluckiest republican
true? >> it is fairly important. >> thinly vailed as an exploration of his foreign policy positions, the game was more gotcha than global strategy. >> but i'll -- >> sdeshs your judgment as to whether you were right or wrong about the search. >> i'll explain why i made those comments. >> i want to know if they were right or wrong. that's a direct question. i expect a direct answer. >> if you would like me to explain why. >> i actually would like an answer. yes or no. >> well, i'm not going to give you a yes or no. i feel it's far more complicated than that. >> the nominee for defense secretary was reportedly asked to claire fews his hiss position on nuclear disarmament. it proved more an opportunity for senators inhoff and graham to show that he is in favor of immediate elimination of all nuclear weapons. chuck hagel wasn't having any of it. >> my position, some of the individuals national security leaders as senator nunn talked about, including himself, has never been unilateral disarmament. ever. never. we have over the years which i have supported the united states has led in red
said that the surge would be "the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam"? were you correct or incorrect? yes or no? >> my reference to the surge -- >> are you answering the question, senator hagel? the question is were you right or wrong? that's a pretty straightforward question. >> well -- >> i would like the answer whether you were right or wrong, and then you are free to elaborate. >> well, i'm not going to give you a yes or no answer on a lot of things. >> well, let the record show you refused to answer that question. now please go ahead. >> well, if you would like me to explain why -- >> i actually would like an answer. yes or no? >> well, i'm not going to give you a yes or no. i think it's far more complicated than that. >> senator mccain and a lot of republican washington is banking on the lesson learned from the iraq war, being that we should have started that war, we should have escalated that war, we should have kept that war going, and now ten years on our only regret about the iraq war should be that we're not still there. and the only thing w
by this president represents the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam if it is carried out, i will resist it." you continued on and on talking about what a disaster the search would be, even to the point where it was clear the search was succeeding. in march 2008, you said, "the term " quagmire could apply. even as late as august 29, 2011 , in an interview with the financial times, you said, "i disagree with president obama and his decision to surge in iraq as i did with president bush on the surge in iraq ." do you stand by those comments, senator hagel? >> i stand by them because i made them. >> were you correct in your assessment? >> i would defer to the judgment of history. >> were you write are wrong about the search? >> i will explain why i've made those comments. >> i want to know whether you are right or wrong. i expect a direct answer. >> it we reviewed the record -- >> please answer the question -- were you correct or incorrect when you said that the search would be most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam? correct o
think the speech gimp last night by this president represents the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam, if it's carried out, i will resist it. and then, of course, you continued on and on for months afterwards talking about what a disaster the surge would be. even to the point where it was clear, the surge was succeeding. and in march 2008, you said, quote, here the term "quagmire" could apply. if that's not a quagmire, what is. even as late of august 29th, 2011, 2011, in an interview with the financial times, you said, i disagreed with the president obama, his decision to surge in iraq. as i did with president bush on the surge in iraq. do you stand by that -- those -- those comments, senator hagel? >> well, senator, i stand by them, as i made them. >> you stand by -- were you right? were you correct in your assessment? >> well, i would defer to the judgment of history to sort that out. >> but the committee deserves your judgment as to whether you were right or wrong about the surge. >> i'll explain why i made those comments. >> i want to know if you're r
represents the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam it's carried out, i will resist it. and then, of course, you continued on and on for months afterwards talking about what a disaster the surge would be, even to the point where it was clear the surge was succeeding. in march 2008, you said, quote, here the term quagmire could apply. if that's not a quagmire, then what is? even as late as august 29, 2011, in an interview, 2011, in an interview with the financial times, you said i disagreed with president obama, his decision to surge in iraq as i did with president bush on the surge in iraq. do you stand by that -- those comments, senator hagel? >> well, senator, i stand by them because i made them. >> were you right? were you correct in your assessment? >> well, i would defer to the judgment of history to sort that out -- >> the committee deserves your judgment as to whether you were right or wrong about the surge? >> i'll explain why i made those comments. >> i want to know if you were right or wrong. that's a direct question, i expect a direct answer. >
dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam. if it's carried out, i will resist it. in march 2008 you said, quote, here the term quagmire could apply. >> what are these, the fulbright hearings all over again? i lived through them. and this guy is going back into some "last year at marienbad" kind of weird 1970s movie where you go back into the past that never even happened. why is he fighting hagel over vietnam? >> well, it's interesting because he's ostensibly fighting with him over iraq, but it immediately becomes over vietnam. he seems to be mad that hagel took issue with him about iraq and compared it to vietnam being the big blunder, which, of course, mccain and hagel both served in. you know, when mccain talks about iraq, all he wants to talk about is from the surge on. it's as if everything before that didn't happen and didn't count, and we can still debate whether the surge worked or not, but the bigger issue is whether iraq was as bad as vietnam, and he doesn't want to have that argument. >> here is mccain sinking his teeth into hagel's ankle here, and he w
political allies. >> he said the surge would be dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam. we are incorrect or correct? >> my reference to -- question, senator hagel. when john mccain and in 20008, he admitted hagel would have made a great addition to his cabinet. is not a sentiment he carried over. theon the side of recovery, over 157,000 jobs last month. the unemployment rate rose to 7.9% in december. some good news -- some good economy, the dow jones industrial average is up to date. is the first time since of 2007 it broke 14,000. year the best start to any of dating back to 1994. two days awayt from the raven's facing the 40 in super bowl xlvii. where espnce is live has set up the ultimate football experience. week i have worn a masquerade mask. is a little face paint? almost game time. very appropriate. the super bowl celebration has transformed the city. this is jackson square, the downtown new of orleans. you can see what happened here. created a super bowl pavilion. watching theeen coverage this week, this is look at whatscenes this looks like here. you se
has made haiti one of the top foreign policy projects, helping the impoverished island build back better after the devastating earthquake that killed over a quarter million people. in no small measure has her husband -- president clinton -- been a part of that attempt at restoration of haiti from that devastating earthquake. last week during secretary clinton's final appearance before the senate foreign relations committee, she said -- and i quote -- "every time that blue and white airplane carrying the words "united states of america" touches down in some far-off capital, i feel again the honor it is to represent the world's indispensable nation. madam secretary, you have truly honored us with your indispensable leadership. and on behalf of all of our senate colleagues, we want to thank you for your extraordinary service to this country. and i want to say that your position will be in capable hands with our colleague and your former colleague, senator john kerry, who will serve as we confirm him in the next 24 hours as the 68th secretary of state. senator kerry has served in this
. >> i don't know. >> when you said that the surge would be the most dangerous foreign policy blonder i blunds country since vietnam were you correct or incorrect, yes, or no? >> my reference to the surge being dangerous -- >> the question is were you right or wrong. that is a pretty straightforward question. i would leak the answer whether you are right or wrong and then you are free to elaborate. >> well, i'm not going to give you a yes or no. >> why do you think that the iranian foreign ministry is strongly supports your nomination to be secretary of defense? >> i have a difficult enough time with american politics and senator i have no idea. >> do you think it is appropriate for the chief civilian leader of the u.s. military forces to agree with the statement that both the perception, quote and the reality is that the united states is, jet the world's bully. >> the didn't hear her say that by the way the united states. and i think my comment was it is irdevelop rant in good observation -- irdevelop rant and good observation. i don't think i said that i agree with it. >> as of this a
or incorrect when you said that the surge would be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam? were you correct or incorrect? >> my -- >> yes or no. >> my reference -- >> can you answer the question, senator hagel? the question is, were you right or wrong? that's a pretty straightforward question. >> well -- >> i would like to answer whether you were right or wrong, and then you are free to elaborate. >> well, i'm not going to give you a yes or no answer -- >> well, let the record show you refused to answer this question. now, please go ahead. >> if you would like me to explain why -- >> i actually would like an answer. yes or no. >> well, i'm not going to give you a yes or no. i think it's far more complicated than that, as i have already said. my answer is i'll defer that judgment to history. as to the comment i made about the most dangerous foreign policy decision since vietnam was about not just the surge but the overall war of choice going into iraq. >> i think history has already made a judgment about the surge, sir, and you're on the wrong side of it. >> s
think this speech given last night by this president represents the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since the vietnam. if it is carried out, i will resist it." the question continued on for months and months talking about what a disaster the surge would be even when it was clear the surge was succeeding. in march 2008, you said "the term quagmires could apply. some reject that term, but if that is not a quagmire, what is? even as late as august 29, 2011, in an interview with the "financial times" -- you said i disagree with president obama and his decision to surge in iraq as i did with president obama. do you stand by those comments? >> senator, i stand by them because i made them. >> were you right? where you write in your assessment? >> i would defer to the judgment of history to assert -- to sort that out. >> the committee deserves to know whether you are right or wrong about the search. >> i will explain why -- >> i want to know if you are right or wrong. it's a direct question. >> the surge assisted in the objective. >> will you please answer the questi
. were you correct or incorrect when you said that the surge would be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam were you correct or incorrect yes or no. >> my reference to the surge being the most dangerous-- >> are you going to answer the question senator hagel? the question is whether you were right or wrong. that's pretty straightforward question. >> well, i'm not going to give you a yes or no answer. >> you refused to answer that question. >> you said the jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here i'm not an israeli senator. i'm an united states senator. this pressure makes us do dumb things at times. you said the jewish lobby that term should not have been used. it should have been some other term. name one person in your opinion who is intimidated by the israeli lobby in the united states senate. >> well, first-- >> name one. >> i don't know. >> well why would you say it. >> i didn't have in mind a specific person. >> you're listed as a co-author of that may 2012 global zero report on our nuclear posture. i believe there is a recommendation in t
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 203 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)